A lottery is a scheme for the distribution of prizes by chance. It has a long history, dating back to the Old Testament and Roman emperors, who used it to distribute land and slaves. It was even used in the colonial era to help finance European settlement of America, despite Protestant proscriptions against gambling. But it was the nineteen-sixties when the lottery grew to become the most popular way for state governments to raise money, and, as Cohen writes, that growth was driven by three major forces.

First, the lottery tapped into people’s resentment of paying taxes and fees to support government services they believed were no longer needed. Second, the lottery tapped into the public’s desire to win something tangible. Third, it tapped into Americans’ late-twentieth century tax revolt, as the cost of government soared and states struggled to balance budgets without raising taxes or cutting benefits.

The earliest recorded lotteries were held in the fifteenth century in the Low Countries, where towns would hold public draws to raise money for town fortifications and the poor. Then, in the seventeenth century, England began to establish a pattern of regular national lotteries. They were an important part of the economy and, for a time, a get-out-of-jail card for those who participated, as each ticket carried a clause that provided immunity from arrest for felony crimes except piracy, murder, or treason.

In the United States, the lottery became commonplace after 1964 when New Hampshire legalized it. A dozen other states followed within a few years, especially the Northeast and the Rust Belt. State governments faced a dilemma: their populations were growing faster than their revenue streams, and they needed to raise money for education, infrastructure, and welfare programs. But a poll at the time showed that most people opposed increasing taxes, so they turned to the lottery.

But the popularity of lotteries is not directly related to a state’s actual financial health. Studies have shown that they are consistently endorsed by voters regardless of the state’s fiscal condition. Rather, as Clotfelter and Cook point out, the key is that the proceeds of lotteries are perceived to benefit a specific line item of a state’s budget–usually education but also elder care or aid to veterans.

In fact, most state lottery players are middle-class or upper-middle class, and the poor participate in the games at a much lower proportion than their percentage of the population. A study conducted in South Carolina found that high-school educated, middle-aged men from middle-income neighborhoods are the biggest participators; they also spend more per capita on tickets than do high-income or low-income groups. Moreover, most respondents to the NORC survey thought that the payout and winning rates of the lottery were not as good as advertised. Nonetheless, they continue to play. And they will probably do so as long as the jackpots are large enough to attract their attention. This is what makes the lottery so addictive.